, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI ... , !',$ %& BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER '' / M.P. NO.238/MDS/2017 (IN I.T.A. NO.2214/MDS/2016) ( )( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI. V. M/S ADHIPARASAKTHI CHARITABLE MEDICAL EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL TRUST, GST ROAD, CHEYYUR, MELMARUVATHUR, KANCHIPURAM DIST. PAN : AAATA 0722 H (+,( /PETITIONER) (+-,./ RESPONDENT) +,( 0 1 /PETITIONER BY : SHRI R.M. NARAYANAN, CA & SHRI N.K. RAJENDIRAN, CA +-,. 0 1 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI N. MADHAVAN, ADDL.CIT 2 0 3$ / DATE OF HEARING : 13.10.2017 4!) 0 3$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17.10.2017 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE REVENUE HAS FILED THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS P ETITION ON THE GROUND THAT THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE ORDER OF T HIS TRIBUNAL DATED 29 TH MARCH, 2017. 2 M.P. NO.238/MDS/17 2. SHRI N. MADHAVAN, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENT ATIVE, SUBMITTED THAT THIS TRIBUNAL HAS NOT ADJUDICATED TH E ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE WITH REGARD TO CLAIM OF EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). WHE N THE ATTENTION OF THE LD. D.R. WAS DRAWN TO THE PARAGRAPHS 7 TO 11OF THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 29 TH MARCH, 2017, THE LD. D.R. SUBMITTED THAT THIS TRIBUNAL HAS NOT SPECIFICALLY SAID THAT THE ASSESSE E IS NOT ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT. 3. WE HAVE HEARD SHRI R.M. NARAYANAN, THE LD. REPRE SENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO. WE ARE UNABLE TO ACCEPT THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. D.R. AT PARA 7 OF THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUN AL, THIS TRIBUNAL REFERRED THE REASONS FOR REJECTION OF EXEMPTION UND ER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. EACH ISSUE WAS EX AMINED SPECIFICALLY AND, ULTIMATELY, THE MATTER WAS REMITT ED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, IT IS NOT COR RECT TO SAY THAT THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION WAS NOT SPECIFICALLY DEALT WITH BY THIS TRIBUNAL. 4. THE NEXT OBJECTION OF THE LD. D.R. IS THAT THE G ROUND NO.7 WITH REGARD TO CAPITAL RECEIPTS OF ` 2,04,24,749/- WAS NOT DISPOSED OF BY THIS TRIBUNAL. 3 M.P. NO.238/MDS/17 5. WE HAVE HEARD LD. D.R. AND LD. REPRESENTATIVE FO R THE ASSESSEE. THE REVENUE SPECIFICALLY RAISED THIS GRO UND AT GROUND NO.7. ADMITTEDLY, THIS GROUND WAS NOT DISPOSED OF BY THIS TRIBUNAL. THEREFORE, THE NON-DISPOSAL OF THIS SPECIFIC GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS AN ERROR WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 2 54(2) OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, THE SPECIFIC GROUND NEEDS TO BE DISPOS ED OF ON MERIT. THEREFORE, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IN I.T.A. NO.2 214/MDS/2016 IS REOPENED ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADJUDICATING GROUN D NO.7 RAISED BY THE REVENUE, ON MERIT. 6. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO POST THE APPEAL FOR ADJUDICATION OF GROUND NO.7 RAISED BY THE REVENUE, ON 20 TH NOVEMBER, 2017. IT MAY NOT BE NECESSARY FOR THE REGISTRY TO ISSUE SEPA RATE NOTICE OF HEARING. IN OTHER WORDS, COPY OF THIS ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL SERVES AS NOTICE OF HEARING FOR 20.11.2017. 7. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATION, THE MISCELLANEOUS PE TITION FILED BY THE REVENUE STANDS PARTLY ALLOWED. 4 M.P. NO.238/MDS/17 ORDER PRONOUNCED COURT ON 17 TH OCTOBER, 2017 AT CHENNAI. SD/ SD/- ( !' ) ( ... ) (SANJAY ARORA) (N.R.S. GANESAN) $ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 6 /DATED, THE 17 TH OCTOBER, 2017. KRI. 0 +37' 8')3 /COPY TO: 1. +,( / PETITIONER 2. +-,. /RESPONDENT 3. 2 93 () /CIT(A) 4. 2 93 /CIT 5. ': +3 /DR 6. ;( < /GF.